<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?>
<rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:wfw="http://wellformedweb.org/CommentAPI/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
	xmlns:sy="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/syndication/"
	xmlns:slash="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/slash/"
	>

<channel>
	<title>Three Five Photography &#187; photo</title>
	<atom:link href="http://threefivephotography.com/tag/photo/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://threefivephotography.com</link>
	<description>Photography for the new Pro, BY a new Pro</description>
	<lastBuildDate>Wed, 25 Aug 2010 05:05:29 +0000</lastBuildDate>
	<generator>http://wordpress.org/?v=2.9.1</generator>
	<language>en</language>
	<sy:updatePeriod>hourly</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>1</sy:updateFrequency>
			<item>
		<title>Why photographers DON&#8217;T need the iPad &#8230; yet!</title>
		<link>http://threefivephotography.com/2010/02/how-photographers-dont-need-the-ipad/</link>
		<comments>http://threefivephotography.com/2010/02/how-photographers-dont-need-the-ipad/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Sat, 06 Feb 2010 20:56:20 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>Walt</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Photography Technology]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[apple]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[editorial]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[ipad]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[opinion]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[photo]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[photography]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[wedding photography]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://threefivephotography.com/?p=208</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[Some other bloggers in the blogsphere have been posting like long winded madmen about the most holy iPad. Before I get into my argument on why the iPad ISN&#8217;T something a photographer should pursue without serious forethought, I should throw out a disclaimer. I am a huge Apple fan. I&#8217;m writing this post on my [...]]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Some other bloggers in the blogsphere have been posting like long winded madmen about the most holy iPad. Before I get into my argument on why the iPad ISN&#8217;T something a photographer should pursue without serious forethought, I should throw out a disclaimer. I am a huge Apple fan. I&#8217;m writing this post on my new Apple Bluetooth keyboard which is connected to my 3 week old Macbook Pro, which is sitting beside my iMac, which syncs with my Apple TV, which I can control with my iPhone. Needless to say &#8230; I like Apple. I have been for the better part of 7 years when I bought my first Apple laptop, a 12&#8243; Powerbook G4 1Ghz. Now that that is out there, lets get started, hit the jump for more &#8230; <span id="more-208"></span></p>
<p>As most people know by now, Apple announced the iPad on Jan. 27th to much applaud and fanfare. Going so far as to call it evolutionary and &#8220;magical.&#8221; However, after the announcement there were many naysayers who were expecting a tablet style laptop, not a Supersized iPod Touch. Or the more humorous &#8220;4 iPhones Taped Together 1.0&#8243; &#8230; at least on 4 iPhones Taped Together 1.0 I could multitask. </p>
<p>Personally, Im on the fence. I can see some potential, but I think it will be many months before we see really significant movement of iPads and iPad targeted apps. With that being said, lets take a look at this device from the photography side of things.</p>
<p>#1 Use of the iPad for Photogs: Sleek On-Site Portfolio</p>
<p>There you have it people, all laid bare, one sentence, no going on and on about potential. 500.00+ base price, PLUS a possible 130.00/year for 3G access &#8230; for a photo album. You see, potential is important, but potential energy hasn&#8217;t manifested itself yet. Unless you convert it to something useful, it just sits there. Besides, 500 bucks will buy a nice prime lens.</p>
<p>Yes, Im aware of the add on that *might* allow you to offload images from your camera or SD card &#8230; the latter throws the Pros out right off the bat. And even if they did support CF, a 64GB device isn&#8217;t nearly enough space. If I can only view images, again, there are much better products to fill that gap. For instance, Epson&#8217;s line of portable backup/image viewer drives. Look and backup at the same time, for less money than the iPad.</p>
<p>For other uses, such as web, email, and audio/video &#8230; there are cheaper and more robust alternatives to the iPad. One of those choices is the newly released Asus Tablet netbook. Some might scoff at the idea of a netbook, but a tablet netbook offers all the functions of the iPad along with the ability to shoot tethered in the field, offload new images, and isn&#8217;t restricted to draconian DRM rules.</p>
<p>In short, Im officially recommending that photographers abstain from buying the iPad for at least the foreseeable future, at least for professional uses beyond a portable portfolio. With that being said, I have a good feeling, given the past, that Apple will rapidly make strides to enhance the iPad to a level where photogs might be able to get enough use from it to justify the price tag. But until then &#8230; enjoy that new prime lens.</p>
<p><center><A href="http://www.adorama.com/?kbid=65523"><br />
<img src="http://www.adorama.com/artworks2/banners/affil/Adorama_2010_468_60.jpg" border=0></a></center></p>
]]></content:encoded>
			<wfw:commentRss>http://threefivephotography.com/2010/02/how-photographers-dont-need-the-ipad/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
		</item>
	</channel>
</rss>
